The real stories from inside the F1 paddock

Your GP+ is now available

Sorry about the delay, we had a corrupted file and had to rebuild the magazine…

Lewis Hamilton ruled in Singapore on Sunday evening – and the Englishman ended the day back in the lead of the World Championship after Nico Rosberg’s dreams of glory were interrupted by software gremlins before he could even start the race. Lewis did not have it easy. A badly-timed Safety Car gave him a mountain to climb, but he hopped and skipped his way to the summit. Sebastian Vettel had his best result of the year to finish second with team-mate Dan Ricciardo chasing him to the line. The race itself was a bit of a slow burner, but it caught fire at the end with some sensational action in the closing laps.

As F1 now heads for Japan, Hamilton leads the World Championship again.

In GP+ this week…

– We rip the 2015 F1 calendar apart…
– We look at the radio communication ban
– We praise F1’s brilliant hybrid achievements
– And we have some amazing tales from the Bonneville Salt Flats, Utah
– JS asks difficult questions that F1 needs to ask
– The Hack gets his teeth into Luca Montezemolo
– DT speeds along the salt
– Peter Nygaard captures the glory of F1 in Singapore

If you haven’t heard of GP+, you are missing out big time. This is the fastest F1 magazine in the world. It is published before the cars have cooled down properly. And we’re not pretending to be there in the F1 Paddock. We are there and we’re mixing with the movers and shakers. If you want to know what is really happening this is the place to find it. We are passionate about the sport and we have strong opinions – and a huge amount of experience. We don’t believe in sound bytes, so we tell the story in depth… We even know the history of Grand Prix racing and are happy to share it.

GP+ is the fastest F1 magazine in the world. It’s so fast, it’s almost real-time… But it is a magazine that tells you the full story, like racing magazines used to do. Yet it is published in electronic form in PDF format, so you can read it on a laptop or a tablet.

GP+ is an amazing bargain. You get 22 issues for £29.99, covering the entire 2014 Formula 1 season.

34 Responses

I know Nico Rosberg is public enemy number one, especially among some of the English/Hamilton fans.But I think he showed real class yesterday in the way he reacted both during and after the race. Not once did he lose it on the radio, or question why he was been kept out running at the back of the field in a car that was hardly drivable. Nor did he make any silly comments to the press afterwards.For a man who had just lost the lead in the drivers championship it was a test of his true character.

Well said, Brendan. Very true. All credit to Nico. Very embarrassing glitch for Mercedes, effectively removing Hamilton’s only real challenger even before the start. How can F1 team spend so many millions and yet not be able to get one of its cars into first gear on the grid? Its 2014 car is way quicker than anything else on the grid, but it is a tad fragile. At least Singapore closed up the drivers’ title chase as they head to a proper circuit next. Bring on Suzuka.

I think it’s actually a sign of less passion and hunger for the title than Hamilton. Rosberg wants the title. Hamilton not only wants the title, he NEEDS the title more than his next breath. It’s a hunger and it’s on his thoughts constantly. I don’t think that’s the case with Rosberg. I almost get the impression that if he didn’t get it, he wouldn’t be all that troubled. If something goes wrong for Hamilton, he’s devastated, but in recent times he has shown that he bounces back better, again and again, from these setbacks. That’s the passion and why he reacts the way that he does. If Rosberg had that hunger and passion, then he would have been devastated by the things going wrong with the car. But he wasn’t. It wasn’t maturity – in fact there was virtually no reaction at all. I mean, just compare his reaction to Grosjeans in qualifying when his care wouldn’t behave: “Bloody engine! Bloody engine!” There’s a world of difference just there.

His outward behavior has changed a lot since his pr coach had a word in his ear post belgium. Hard to argue that the better driver so far is leading the wdc. For us fans, it is unfortunate that in recent races we haven’t seen enough straight fights between Lewis and nico.

I absolutely agree with you, Samir. Nico looked very normal and genuine in the team winner’s photo, and that was enough for me. Everyone involved is better than to trash real racing now. I trust my feeling it’s time to put all that silliness away now. Cross fingers for the racing, cross fingers to feel the fresh air again that this season can be all about. Huge huge message to get right for everyone,

Concerning a Farewell to LDM, although I’m not a fan of Ferrari primarily because of the unconscionable & unfair advantages bestowed on the Team by Bernie/FOM and the FIA; I nonetheless have long admired LDM; So I was indeed impressed to read a very elegantly written “Appreciation” of LDM in the Saturday/Sunday edition of the WSJ (p.D12) titled “In Praise of Ferrari’s Departing Chairman” by Dan Neil.

That reads up there with some of the best general auto reporting I have enjoyed. Note the possibly barbed hints of how Ferrari is fêted for devoting attentions beyond normal business sense to sport, and by implication, fairness .. a “gallant disregard of best business practices in the name of global sport”.

There’s even a sense, in the way the California is considered as being progeny of Montezemolo’s “midas touch”, that that created a continuity that was unexpected but readily accepted as success, hinting at another change might yet transmit the genetics to a successful but at first apparently different breed. In fact, it is almost as if the author says that Luca set the scene for change from the normally aspirated past of Ferrari, and is a kind of author of the necessary change. If nothing else, it is a elegant way to soften the blow of any idea he was cleared out for holding back the future. Or a marker, for later reconsideration.

It’s a article loaded with portent, as much as it is a tribute.

Call me cynical, but I never quite believe that articles this well written just happen… but i’ll happily take it for face value.

Hi John (o J). Welcome back. I certainly agree that aspects of the piece in the Journal was written like one of those pre-prepared Obits found in tier one papers such as the Times; Telegraph; NYT & the WSJ. Implicit in the prose of your highly nuanced observations is the contention that there are indeed other strategic intent and interests woven into such a tribute. How cynical of you.

I nevertheless wholeheartedly concur with your analysis. Further, due to the breadth & depth of the piece I too wondered if the Journal had any additional agenda and whether it was being used to succinctly communicate prospective corporate directions. So as you reasoned the logical deduction of this expansive piece praising a dethroned Division head and lauding that Division’s products was, as well elementally indicating that major structural and operational changes are forthcoming – spread over a FULL page. This is remarkable journalism indeed.

(BTW: I should note that your twin writes as Joe Morgenstern for the Journal. His writing style is quite similar to yours and consists of similarly elegant grad prose that are normally infused your posts. In view of your natural range you should enjoy the riveting debates between Demea, Philo & Cleanthes in David Hume’s Dialogues Concerning NR. This, I believe, was his outstanding contribution to the “Argument from Design” debates that gripped Europe in the 18th century).

Back to F1. I am very pleased that LH won the race. Hopefully, he’ll enjoy similar successes in the remaining five races. I was however, a little disappointed that Alonso did not get on the Podium. Do you think he will leave Ferrari? Should he elect to leave his only real option is McLaren where he would enjoy his preferred prima donna status. It would be a mistake to go to RB where the young Turk DR would likely do to him what he is doing to Vettel.

The titbits in the latest issue on what Mercedes might have been doing with telemetry, radio, and a driver in the simulator at Brackley were very interesting.

Doing a few quick sums, a driver in the sim running every session in real time (three practices, qualy, and race, from Australia to Monza) would clock up around 12,000 km of running — the same sim mileage that Mercedes says Pascal Wehrlein has done. It was interesting as well to get a glimpse of Wehrlein in the Mercedes garage — the first time I remember him actually being at a race meeting — and at a race where (a) driver coaching is newly banned, and (b) Hamilton’s advantage per lap was measured in tenths rather than seconds.

It’s created a whole distraction and parallel rumor mill, at a time many would care for a bit of privacy smoke… do you think, Joe?

As form the pit calls, I am going to try to ignore them. If really they have a impact on points, I don’t see how we can even start guessing, short of complete tapes being released. Oh, I really don’t want to know, now, any of it. There’s something wrong, when one gets down to discussing the details of steering wheel messaging tricks… is this mean to make for cynicism? I have to admit I am wary of falling for something inadvertently.

There are lots of potential explanations for Mercedes losing some of the dominating margin they’ve held elsewhere on the calendar.

Clearly a major strength of the Mercedes car is the power unit in the back – take a look at the top six in qualifying in Monza and you’ll see that the Merc unit is a monster. But Singapore is a slower, tighter street circuit where, especially with limited room to manoeuvre with gear ratios this year, an engine advantage is going to have limited impact.

You can add aerodynamic performance to the equation too, aerodynamic drag is proportional to speed squared so any aero advantage Mercedes have will be reduced by the slower racing in Singapore.

Taking a look at Monaco qualifying, Ricciardo was much closer to the pole time (+0.3s) than he was in Spain the race before (+1.0s) or than Vettel was in Canada the race after (+0.7s).

Since then, of course, the cars have been updated. But it’s pretty clear that the rest of the field are improving their cars faster than Mercedes are improving theirs – various principles of diminishing returns make that normal. That Red Bull have roughly halved their deficit between Monaco and Singapore probably says more about their engineering achievement than it does about the effect of “Bernie’s Law”.

I’m not saying there is absolutely no effect from banning driving instructions, but it’s much too early to draw any conclusions as Singapore performance is a little out of the ordinary in F1 terms.

I, for one, expect normal service (Mercedes crushing the opposition) to be resumed in Suzuka where racing speeds are more like Spa than Monaco.

Confucius might say “the answer my friend is blowing in the wind.” Wait, I think these are a few lyrics from some ghastly song by a pedestrian group. One could argue that a few reasons for the absence of manufacturers lining up to enter or re-enter F1 stem from the unfair playing field on which to compete. And the escalating cost of operation.

First, granting Ferrari very special privileges are anathema to equality and fair play. In doing so, F1 has created a multi-tier system that does not exist or tolerated in any other sport. Allowing one team to not only double-dipped in F1 resources but also possessing veto rights have become major barriers to entry for manufacturers. Second, other barriers include the absence of spending constraints on all teams and the blatant injustices in the distribution of prize funds

I don’t think Ferrari, or rather their group, are ignoring this unfairness, any more. As if they ever did, but that’s where my crystal ball cannot gaze. Somehow they never got truly plastered by the fact in broader opinion. Maybe it was affordances for the old guard, but that era is gone, and. a much more daunting world faces any company. It takes Ferrari to change things, and there are things they want more than concessions in F1. But they will not give up something for nothing. What they might want, and might possibly get, and the effect of that, the positive effect of that is worth a lot of thought. It possibly was a stronger move to say goodbye to LdM than we can know. Any observer can tell he was made to fall on his sword. It was done with dignity, How else could it be done. There’s a silly season so much bigger than where the fastest Spaniard may sit himself, at so many levels, and I think it will consume everything until well into next year, the year after we’ll see the results. I think this talk of three cars and eight teams is a transitional move, not to be fearful of, but a shakedown, or maybe we will accept it as a spring cleaning, given a little time and real contenders newly entrant. It’s a huge move to imagine but it could be tempered by just how undersold the sport it, cushioning heavy blows, difficult transitions. I think so many believe it is high time for change, but so few are really looking forward, as opposed to clinging to pseudo or selective nostalgia. Let’s have change, of a substantive kind. The kind that challenges us to learn anew, appreciate anew, renew our vows, as it were.

John (oJ) I do agree with you that the new guards (headed by one my fellow Canucks) will be more sensitive to the issue and will ultimately correct the imbalance. So it is not unreasonable for us to give him some time to correct the prevailing unfairness.

Concerning your next point, they probably were not “plastered” about this issue because of the fairly widespread belief that “F1 needs Ferrari more than…;” Many teams, many influencial decision makers as well as many journalists share this belief. A few months subsequent to the bloody nose sustained in Bahrain LDM was at it again by sending out that famous letter inviting all stakeholders to a meeting to fix the problems in the sport. I was very surprised when a leading journalsit over at Autosport supported LDM’s efforts and referred to “Ferrari as the guardian of the sport”.

We do owe Joe a debt of gratitude for aggressively championing the need and appropriatness to restore fairness, equality and transperancy to the sport. His has been the only voice in the journalism forest, crying out for justice for all. Good work Joe. In the feature article “Mystery For the Sake of Mystery” Joe tells us that under the current agreement, Ferrari collects 5% off the top of the EBITDA in addition to its regular share of the distributed prize money. Didn’t it occur to Bernie etc that this particular formulation was reinforcing certain unfortunte stereotyping. Yikes

” … but they will not give something for nothing…” I do hope that the tradeoff is not a 3rd car.